The following article by Alex Penk, first appears appeared on Maxim Institute’s website and is republished here with permission.
Stick it to the man – source brainlesstales.com
Rage against the machine. Stick it to the man. If you’re not for us, you’re against us. They’re familiar sayings, and sometimes comforting ones, especially when our nation is in the thick of debate about issues that really fire people up—euthanasia, cannabis, and most recently, abortion. But while it’s right to feel passionate about these issues, it’s also possible to go too far. In fact, there are signs that we already have. So it’s time to make a—hopefully not too earnest—plea for civility.
Rage against the machine. Stick it to the man. If you’re not for us, you’re against us.
Let me give a couple of examples of the problem. Recently the Labour MP Kieran McAnulty tweeted that he’d been called a Nazi, a liar, a prick, and a bastard after he’d announced that he would support the Abortion Legislation Bill. The Abortion Law Reform Association has a page titled “Email Your Rage!”, urging people to email MPs about reform. There’s even a button to “Blast Them All!” by sending one email to all MPs. But while engaging in abuse and fostering rage might provide a short-term high, they do a lot of long-term damage and they’re wrong—if you want proof, just look at America under President Trump. The antidote is what legal philosopher Jeremy Waldron has called the “chilly virtue” of civility.
He says that civility involves respect for others, even and especially for people you disagree with deeply. It’s a “chilly virtue” because it’s about “formality,” not feelings. It means being committed to certain rules of engagement, binding ourselves to a procedure for dispute resolution, and accepting the outcome because we know we’ll never reach consensus on these issues. Like all virtues, it has to be practised to become part of who we are.
Civility involves respect for others, even and especially for people you disagree with deeply.
Practising it means striving, as Waldron has also said, for a society where “everyone tries to answer the best, not the worst, that can be made of their opponents’ positions,” and “consider that they might be mistaken and to imagine at any rate what it must be like to hold another view”. It means recognising that the “other side” aren’t monsters, they’re people like us with competing views of what’s good and right, and competing judgments about how to prioritise the goods we do agree on.
So, for example, if you oppose euthanasia, you should recognise that supporters genuinely believe we need this practice to prevent needless suffering and to uphold freedom of choice. If you support euthanasia, you should recognise that opponents are genuinely concerned that it would create a risk of wrongful death, especially for the most vulnerable. To return to Waldron, it means recognising that people we disagree with might be our opponents, but they are not our enemies.
So we should contest these big, divisive issues, and all the others that politics brings our way. We should argue vigorously for our view, and that the other side is wrong, and debate the facts. But we can’t afford to stoop to abuse or rage. We have to be better than that. After all, we still have to live together when these debates are over.
Alex Penk leads the work and mission of Maxim Institute, representing their work in public, and speaking and writing about public leadership – a topic he studied during his time as a Visiting Fellow at the McDonald Centre at Oxford University in Trinity Term 2016. His previous study includes a Master of Laws from Cambridge University and degrees in law and science from the University of Auckland.
Maxim Institute is an independent think tank, working to promote the dignity of every person in New Zealand, by standing for freedom, justice, and compassion.
The New Zealand Christian Network has a number of major concerns about the proposed liberalisation of New Zealand’s abortion legislation.
What is missing in the proposed new legislation, asserts spokesperson Dr Stuart Lange, is clear evidence of concern to respect and protect the life of those unborn. “How can politicians say they care about society’s most vulnerable people, then have this huge blind spot about those most vulnerable of all, unborn children?”
The existing legislation is less than perfect, and often too loosely applied, but it does at least implicitly seek to balance the health of the mother and the great seriousness of ending an unborn baby’s life.
Those proposing the change say that abortion needs to be “decriminalised”. But that is a misleading argument. Under the current legislation, no woman undergoing a “lawful” abortion is ever committing a criminal act. Only abortionists who operate outside of the law commit a crime.
Proponents of the change say that abortion must become simply a “woman’s health issue”. But what about the health of the unborn child? Abortion remains an extreme and tragic event, invariably with fatal consequences for one of the two people involved.
The network acknowledges that aborting a baby is often an agonising decision for a woman, and can also have ongoing effects on her well-being.
NZCN believes that current legislation, for all its flaws, is much to be preferred to what is proposed.
It urges members of parliament to vote against what is proposed.
Dr Stuart Lange National Director New Zealand Christian Network
Dr Stuart Lange – National Director, New Zealand Christian Network
The Prime Minister of New Zealand has recently expressed the laudable view that we need a world which celebrates the diversity of its citizens and migrants. Absolutely so. People of all sorts of beliefs and worldviews want a society which is compassionate, respectful, just and free. We are right to resist any erosion of those values, and to consider very carefully what laws and behaviour best protects them.
The Christchurch events have raised concerns over on-line “hate speech”, which among other things helped incite appalling racist violence. The Folau controversy in Australia has opened up other important issues, in New Zealand as well, around freedoms of belief and expression, and whether people should lose their job for expressing (even when they are not at work) beliefs which some find offensive. At the same time, there is currently discussion in Government circles about legislation to prohibit “hate speech”. It is unclear yet what legislative changes may be proposed.
Protection of “minorities”
It is right that society welcome, respect and protect minorities. That is an expression of a just and humane society. It is unhelpful, though, to give any groups more rights than any other groups. All people should be treated equally, with the same rights and restraints.
The laws of this land need to be neutral, equally respecting the rights of belief and expression for people of all faiths, and of none.
In a changing society, it is increasingly problematical to assume which group is a majority, and which group is a minority, and what may happen later. Muslims and Buddhists, for instance, are both currently minorities. Christianity is often assumed to be the “majority” religion. But recent censuses have put Christian adherence at less than 50%. So are Christians now a minority too? The “secular” view is assumed by many to be the only view which should prevail. But is it a majority or a minority? The laws of this land need to be neutral, equally respecting the rights of belief and expression for people of all faiths, and of none.
Prejudice and “hate”
Discussion around possible legislative change often includes rhetoric about “hate”. Nobody doubts that true “hate” is destructive, both for those who are hated and those who hate. In terms of public policy and law, however, the word “hate” is not a useful word. It is too broad in meaning to be of any use. Human beings can say they “hate it” when something very trivial happens, or that they “hate” instant coffee. They can hate evil and injustice. They can harbour in their hearts prejudice or hate against other ethnicities and cultures. Occasionally, human beings can hate others with such vicious, demonic hatred that they actually want to hurt or kill people (as with murderers, terrorists, and genocidal despots such as Hitler). The last of those categories of hate – that which incites or commits violence – is clearly abhorrent and evil, and should always be unlawful.
Mild prejudice is not hate. All human beings have at least a little prejudice in them, influencing our views on politics, religion, sports, and many other things. Deep prejudice, however, can be associated with real hate. Racist hatred is especially repugnant, and needs to be actively discouraged. It is irrational, unjust, and cruel. But even the expression of racist views should be unlawful only when it is deliberately seeking to foster contempt and/or to incite racial violence.
Strongly prejudiced opinions can be irritating and offensive. We hear and read them every day, on public and social media. But the risk of being offended is the unavoidable price of freedom of belief and freedom of expression. It would be nice if many people were to tone down their opinions, especially those we disagree with. But there needs to be a high threshold before expressed opinions are deemed either “hateful” or unlawful. Society must strenuously protect freedom of belief and expression. Our liberty, our life, our society depend on those freedoms, and when they are curtailed we are letting go far too much.
Society must strenuously protect freedom of belief and expression. Our liberty, our life, our society depend on those freedoms, and when they are curtailed we are letting go far too much.
Politicised language
The word “hate” has become unhelpfully politicised. For instance, in many circles the meaning of “hate” appears to have become extended to include the expression of views that do not align with those of a particular community. Clearly, society must defend the right of that community to express and promote their beliefs. Equally, though, society must defend the right of other people to hold and express contrary views, including those beliefs some disagree with or find offensive, such as the belief (which is very widely held, and not just by Christians) that God intended marriage as the union of a man and woman.
To speak against beliefs we disagree with is everyone’s democratic right, and – unless we want tyranny – that right to freedom of belief and expression must cut both ways. To label as “hate speech” those views we disagree with, and to denigrate those who hold them, looks like vilification. To push for someone to lose their job for expressing their religious beliefs, as has happened with Folau, is a very disturbing encroachment on freedom of belief and expression.
A level playing field
In our multi-cultural, multi-faith society, most Christians do not want or require special privileges for themselves. All they really need is what everyone else needs: a society where there are equal freedoms of belief and expression, and freedom from discrimination, for people of all faiths, and for people of no faith. A society where any person, whether religious or secular, is free to believe and express and live by the tenets of their faith, without fear of censure, or of losing their job, or of public vilification. A society where believing in your creed (Christian, Muslim, or whatever) or publicly quoting your holy book will not lead to getting into trouble with the law, your educational provider, your employer, your professional body, or being censured by the media. A society where everyone remains perfectly free to promote both secular views and religious views, without discrimination. A society where anyone may express and advocate any belief about culture, religion, morality, or marriage, without any fear of being labelled as “unsafe”, just because someone might be offended. What do we need to ensure a free society? Freedom of belief and expression for all: a level playing field.
What do we need to ensure a free society?
Freedom of belief and expression for all: a level playing field.
Respect and restraint
Regardless of the laws around public discourse, and how they might be shaped, both secular people and people of faith do well to speak and act with goodwill and respect for all others, out of a sense of common humanity, and a desire to preserve the peace of our free and diverse society. We should speak the truth as we see it, but do so with kindness and respect. Being deliberately offensive has never been good behaviour. Christians, who believe that Jesus is the perfect revelation and embodiment of God, have a superb example to follow: he spoke enduring truth, with infinite grace and compassion.
Dr Stuart Lange National Director, New Zealand Christian Network
Pentecost is a good moment to take a reality check concerning any lurking idolatry of nationalism in our hearts.
The events described by Luke in the opening chapters of The Acts of the Apostles remind us that the end goal of God’s purposes in human history is the ingathering of a multi-ethnic global church: ‘from every tribe, language, people and nation’, as John writes in his Revelation (5:9).
The outpouring of the Spirit birthed this ‘rainbow’ church when Jews and converts, including Cretans and Arabs, from ‘every nation under heaven’, heard the disciples praising God in the languages of their lands of residence. So Peter stood up to explain that what everyone was witnessing was what the prophet Joel had foretold would happen in ‘the last days’.
Clearly we have been in the last days therefore ever since Pentecost. Also clearly, this was only the start of the fulfilment of this prophecy. The Spirit is yet to be poured out on all flesh. There is still much more to come–something that should excite us.
It should also caution us against the sort of religious nationalism being preached from political platforms on both sides of the Atlantic these days. We live somewhere between Acts chapter 2 and Revelation chapter 5, as part of the process of a church becoming increasingly multi-cultural. The New Jerusalem will be multi-racial and multi-lingual, all focused on the One who will reconcile all things under heaven and on earth.
Inclusive
Yet too often we see believers making the same mistake for which Israel was rebuked by the prophets and by Jesus himself: ethno-centrism. Instead of embracing God’s purposes for all peoples, Israel focused too often on being the Chosen. Too often they adopted an ‘Israel first’ policy. But they forgot what they had been chosen for: to bless all the peoples of the world, and be a light to the peoples.
Here is a sober warning for those tempted to embrace a religious nationalism ‘to preserve our Christian heritage’. The gospel is inclusive, intended for all peoples. It is not the exclusive right of westerners. We are better people when we commit to the welfare of others, that is to ‘loving our neighbours’. We are better nations when we promote the common good of the community of nations, not an ethnic nationalism which places one nation over others as a political goal.
As Christians, we strive to follow the exclusive claims of the gospel. Yet those of us living in countries shaped by Christianity–Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant–often assume that the marriage of faith and nationalism is good and biblical. For ‘Christian nationalism’ has roots back in the Constantinian conversion of Rome to Christianity, or even further to the Old Testament covenant between God and Israel. At different stages of history, Christians have claimed a ‘divine instrument’, ‘manifest destiny’, or ‘light to the nations’ calling–from Constantine’s Roman Empire through to Charlemagne’s Holy Roman Empire, Holy Orthodox Russia, Britain versus Spain, Afrikaners in South Africa and the United States.
Catholics are generally less vulnerable than Protestants to the temptations of a ‘God and country’ mentality, being conscious of belonging to a ‘catholic’ (meaning ‘universal’) Church, rather than identifying with one particular nation like the Church of England or the Dutch Reformed Church. And yet today in Catholic nations like Hungary, Poland and Italy, religious nationalism threatens to further undermine the foundations of free and open society in the name of ‘preserving our Christian heritage’.
Chaplain
Eastern Orthodox Churches however tend to closely identify with their ethnic nationalities: Greek Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox, Bulgarian Orthodox, Ukrainian Orthodox, and so on. Church-state relations in the Orthodox world have
always be based on the concept of symphonia or harmony, which often meant the church became the chaplain rather than prophet to the state.
Too often we assume nations have always been around and are the God-designed unit of human community. We quote Acts 17:26 about God having ‘made from one man every nation of mankind to live on the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their lands.’ But nation-states as we see them on our world map today are recent developments, as opposed to ethne (peoples), the word used in Acts 17. The French Revolution set off a wave of nationalism across Europe sparking revolutions which still continue to affect this continent. The twentieth century has been described as ‘a century of nations and nationalism’, a ‘bloody religion whose victims dwarf in number the casualties of the crusades’, ‘a reaction against historic Christianity, against the universal mission of Christ’.
Pentecost emboldened the disciples to declare to the authorities: ‘We must obey God rather than men’ (Acts 5:29). May the Spirit embolden us also to stand for truth, love and justice, and for God’s purposes for all peoples.
Jeff Fountain is director of the Schuman Centre for European Studies, affiliated with the University of the Nations. Originally from New Zealand, Jeff has lived in Europe for 38 years and carries a Dutch passport. He was director of Youth With A Mission Europe for 20 years and chairs the Hope For Europe Round Table. Jeff writes an email column called Weekly Word and has written several books including Living as People of Hope and Deeply Rooted.
As WEA member alliances seek to strengthen religious freedom in their respective countries, U.N. mechanisms and bodies are proving to be an important medium to amplify their respective voices, and their impact. Below you will find an overview of some of our appeals and activities at the Human Rights Council (HRC) in Geneva in recent months.
In March, in a statement read before more than one hundred international diplomats gathered at the HRC, we called on the government of SRI LANKA to revoke the 2008 Circular related to the construction of places of worship that curtailed the rights of religious minorities and subjected them to harassment. (Written statement submitted together with the National Christian Evangelical Alliance of Sri Lanka; Oral statement together with Christian Solidarity Worldwide; video).
We called on both INDIA and PAKISTAN to repeal anti-conversion and anti-blasphemy legislation respectively, to hold their law enforcement officials accountable when they fail to protect religious minorities, and to counter the stigmatization and hate against religious minorities. (Written statement submitted together with the Evangelical Fellowship of India; oral statement; video)
Together with L’Eglise Protestante d’Algérie, we called on the authorities of ALGERIA to re-open all churches closed since November 2017. (Written statement in French)
We urged the government of MALAYSIA to ensure the wellbeing and safety of all religious workers and the freedom to carry out their duties without intimidation or threat, and we called on Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad to order new police investigations into the abduction of Pastor Koh and the disappearances of three religious activists. (Oral statement; video)
On April 3, Malaysia’s Human Rights Commission issued a report that, for the first time, accused State agents of the abduction of Pastor Koh in 2017. The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship of Malaysia issued a statement calling for the immediate investigation of all parties involved in the disappearances.
We appealed to the government of IRAQ to officially recognize the evangelical churches and grant them legal status. (Report)
We called on VIET NAM to review the 2016 Law on Belief and Religion, to protect the right of ethnic minorities to change religion, and to stop harassment, oppression and violence against Hmong Christians and other minority religious groups. (Report)
We reiterated that peace in the CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC cannot take place without accountability for war crimes and justice. (Oral statement in French)
During a debate at the HRC on the mitigation and countering of risingnationalist populism, we affirmed that Christianity means loving our neighbors and welcoming the stranger, and we expressed concern that so-called Christian values have been leveraged to foster hatred and discrimination against those adhering to other religions, or from other nationalities and regions of the world. (Video)
During the same period, we met with diplomatic missions, U.N. representatives and other stakeholders, to convey more widely the messages and requests of our member alliances.
In a press release earlier today, the Evangelical Alliance of the United Kingdom (EAUK) highlighted a brief video interview with the pastor of Zion Church, which was one of the targets of the Easter Sunday bombings. The World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) would like to give greater exposure to the moving testimony of Pastor Roshan Mahesen and invites Christians to continue to pray for their brothers and sisters in Sri Lanka.
Bp Efraim Tendero, WEA Secretary General and CEO, expressed his solidarity with the Christians in Sri Lanka in a statement after the attacks, saying: “We are deeply saddened and troubled by the news of the targeted attacks on worshippers and other innocent people on Easter Sunday. As we celebrate the resurrection of our Lord, Jesus Christ, we now also mourn the loss of lives due to this heartless violence. We call on churches around the world to join us in prayer for those affected, and that God’s strong and comforting presence may be with them in this tragedy. May God help them to hold onto the faith of the resurrection and experience the peace that transcends all understanding.
EAUK Press Release
The leader of the evangelical church bombed in Batticaloa, Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday has spoken out, offering forgiveness to the attackers, and thanks to all who have offered prayer and support. Pastor Roshan Mahesen also spoke of his commitment to continue the church’s mission.
Speaking in London this week Pastor Roshan said: “We are hurt. We are angry also, but still, as the senior pastor of Zion Church Batticaloa, the whole congregation and every family affected, we say to the suicide bomber, and also to the group that sent the suicide bomber, that we love you and we forgive you, no matter what you have done to us, we love you, because we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.
“Jesus Christ on the Cross, he said father forgive them for they do not know what they are doing. We also, who follow the footsteps of Jesus Christ, we say, for the Lord forgive these people.”
In the video shared by Sri Lankan Christian ministry ‘The Life’, Pastor Roshan went on to say: “I want to take this opportunity to thank every church around the world, every believer, every person known to me and unknown to me who has contacted me, calling me, sending messages of condolences, and then words of encouragement.
“I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart, every word you speak brings such comfort and strength. We will stand and continue what the lord has purposed in our life and we are ready, and we will continue to fulfil the mission the Lord has given us.”
Pastor Chrishanthy Sathiyaraj, leader of a Sri Lankan church which brings together Tamil and Sinhalese Christians and founder of ‘The Life’ ministry, interviewed Pastor Roshan earlier this week while he was visiting the UK.
Pastor Chrishanthy is part of the Evangelical Alliance UK’s council and commented: “These atrocious attacks have shocked the world, the violence has impacted my friends and family and many in the Sri Lankan community in the UK know people who have died.
“If only we can hear Pastor Roshan’s words and respond with forgiveness instead of hate. Jesus Christ calls us to love even those who persecute us, and what is more powerful than to choose to love in circumstances such as these. Let’s forgive, stand together and build the kingdom of God. Don’t give up.”
Steve Clifford, general director of the Evangelical Alliance UK, joined a prayer gathering earlier this week following the attacks as Sri Lankan leaders prayed together. Responding to the video Steve Clifford said: “I am mourning with my Sri Lankan brothers and sisters in Christ as they bury loved ones, as church communities are shaken by the violence inflicted on them and as others live in fear that the same might strike them.
“Pastor Roshan offers love and forgiveness that can only come from knowing that we are forgiven by Jesus. I will continue to pray for him and all the believers in Sri Lanka, that they will know hope in Jesus that overcomes all fear.
